Cases illustrate various problems
Pension-related charges against four companies and/or their directors were adjourned this week after attorneys assured the court in various ways their clients wanted to pay what was properly owed for their employees’ pension contributions.
On Monday, Magistrate Valdis Foldats first heard from attorney Waide Da Costa, who appeared for Halcy Darciel Lofters on behalf of Guardian Security. The case has been before the court since 2008 and Mr. DaCosta advised that the company is now defunct.
Guilty pleas were previously entered to 17 charges of failing to contribute to a pension plan for an employee and seven charges of failing to provide information requested by the Superintendent of Pensions.
The amount owed was $20,000 and payment was offered of $300 per month. “The Pensions office was not pleased with the proposal,” Mr. Da Costa said. “No one wanted to accept $300 per month.”
The defendant and her husband conferred and agreed to raise as much as they could before being sentenced. That date was set for 10 October.
Attorney Morris Garcia appeared on behalf of A&C Construction Ltd. and Clive Smith. He said Mr. Smith had been coming to court for some time to say he had paid $3,000 for the contributions outstanding for two employees.
“For almost the past year the Crown has been alleging that there are other people for whom contributions need to be paid,” Mr. Garcia said. “The court has given the Crown ample time to produce their evidence.” He indicated his client was ready to be sentenced and finish with the matter.
Crown Counsel Kenneth Ferguson objected. He said pension-related charges are unique because the Pensions Office relies on records provided by employers.
“We have been asking this company for information so we can calculate arrears and the information has not been forthcoming,” Mr. Ferguson said.
Mr. Garcia said his client had a letter confirming successful completion of a payment programme.
But Mr. Ferguson told the court, because employers refuse to provide information about their employees, the Pension Board has had to go to the Immigration Department and get employment information from work permit records. In this case, he said, he had received a list of employees.
The magistrate directed that the list be copied for Mr. Garcia and set the matter for mention again on 7 November.
Attorney Clyde Allen represented Cayman Net Ltd on charges that first came to court in 2010. He explained that the late Desmond Seales had operated the company in his name as sole director. [Mr. Seales died in July 2010.] Mr. Allen said probate and corporate matters were taking months to finalise and the share transfer had not yet taken place.
Mr. Allen said there had been an exchange between Mrs. Seales and someone at the Pensions Office. “They keep telling her the matter is before the court.”
“I think it would be helpful if the two of you met,” the magistrate told Mr. Allen and Mr. Ferguson. He directed the case be brought back on 19 September.
On Tuesday, representatives of K. Coast Development and C.I. Precast appeared in court, also before Magistrate Foldats. Because this was just the second mention, he set the matter for 16 November after being told negotiations were under way.
Related Videos
Why does the Immigration Department continue to grant work permits to these businesses? They cannot afford to properly compensate their former employees, why are we encouraging the importation of more poverty, and subsidising them in their competition with businesses which are making the payments required?
Are they up to date with Health Insurance?
…and ought we not reconsider some of the immigration permissions granted to persons who may be intentionally breaching our laws?
This is the only few company. i know one of my friend working as security company.when government start the pension holiday the employer stop the contribution employee forced sign for the pension holiday. so for that employee how the govment will do the cross check..